IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v14y2025i5p289-d1651716.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Normalizing an Implicit and Discursive Secular Norm in Refugee Selection in New Zealand

Author

Listed:
  • Hanyang Ge

    (Independent Researcher, Wellington 6011, New Zealand)

Abstract

New Zealand has a long history of accepting refugees, with a refugee quota programme in place since 1987. New Zealand does not have a formal legislative structure for refugee resettlement. Its design and practice of the refugee quota programme are guided and determined entirely by cabinet ministers’ discretion. A significant gap in scholarly research on refugee resettlement in the New Zealand context is the highly unarticulated assumption of the secularism of the New Zealand statecraft that underpins the unregulated state–refugee relationship. This paper examines a previously confidential government document, only released at the request of the author, which provides official guidance on refugee quota selection, along with other key ministerial briefings. Interviews were also conducted with a refugee quota selection officer and a policy advisor involved in informing refugee resettlement policies. This is the first research paper that focuses specifically on refugee selection in the New Zealand context from a religious studies’ perspective. I show that the rhetoric of New Zealand’s state secularism has a significant impact on refugee quota selection, which normalizes an implicit but discursive secular order. The paper argues that refugee selection by a secular state does not necessarily mean a complete absence of the scrutiny of religion. Instead, the statecraft of a secular host country in the West could be so potent that the constant modelling of religious thinking and practices managed by the state could still end up normalizing the exclusion of Judeo-Christian others.

Suggested Citation

  • Hanyang Ge, 2025. "Normalizing an Implicit and Discursive Secular Norm in Refugee Selection in New Zealand," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:14:y:2025:i:5:p:289-:d:1651716
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/5/289/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/5/289/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:14:y:2025:i:5:p:289-:d:1651716. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.